W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Comments on 12 January 2001 WCAG 2.0

From: Wendy A Chisholm <wendy@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 15:27:17 -0500
Message-Id: <>
To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Thank you for your comments.

>1) Guideline 1 reads "Design content that can be presented
>    according to the needs and preferences of the user
>    and to the capabilities of the user agent and the device(s)."
>    How about:
>    "Design content that allows presentation according to
>     the user's needs and preferences, and the capabilities
>     of the user's environment."

sounds fine to me.

>2) Checkpoint 1.5: "Separate content and structure from
>    presentation". I've mentioned this previously: UAAG 1.0
>    uses the term "content" to mean "everything in the
>    document object". I understand that WCAG 2.0 may use
>    the term content with another meaning. Still, I would
>    encourage harmonization in the use of terms. How about
>    something like:
>      "Organize your ideas first, then design
>       their presentation (on screen, on paper,
>       as audio, as speech, etc.)."

I propose to leave this as is and see what happens at the unified glossary 

>3) Checkpoint 1.7: "Ensure that content transforms gracefully."
>    I think this checkpoint is so broad as to be
>    very problematic.

yes, the working group has resolved to find better wording for several 
reasons but did not have any wording that we felt was sufficient for this 
draft.  We resolved to leave it as is but request feedback in the public 
working draft.

>    How does this checkpoint interact with checkpoint
>    4.2 (use markup, etc. according to specification).
>    If I write perfect HTML and CSS, I'm not in the
>    clear because checkpoint 1.7 says that I also
>    have to ensure that this content transforms
>    gracefully.

Right - you have to be aware that following the spec does not always 
produce content that "works" because browers have not implemented the specs 
consistently.  also, authors should take into account that newer specs have 
deprecated features of older specs or introduced newer features that did 
not exist in older browers.

>    What do you do in the case of presenting an XML
>    document without style sheets? How does that
>    transform gracefully without style sheets?

This checkpoint does not say that XML must be available without style 
sheets.  That is one very obvious bug in WCAG 1.0 that we are not 
replicating in 2.0.  In the case of XML, the transform requires style 
sheets.  However, if the user's browser does not support XML then we might 
have a problem.

>    I don't have a counter-proposal for this checkpoint.
>    I agree with the goal, but I think that it's
>    important to be more specific in stating
>    what's required of the author.

Yes, so do we but we haven't fleshed it out yet.  That's why this is a 
working draft without consensus of the working group rather than a 
recommendation or last call.

>Guideline 2: "Design content that can be interacted
>with according to the preferences and needs of the user."
>    I think that Guideline 2 and Guideline 1 statements
>    should be harmonized. Based on my G1 proposal:
>    "Design content that allows interaction according to
>     the user's needs and preferences.

sounds good.

>4) Checkpoint 2.2: "Minimize content that will
>    interfere with the user's ability to focus."
>    Since in UAAG 1.0 we use the term "focus" to
>    refer to the thing that designates the current
>    focus, this might lead to confusion. Also, I
>    think that "minimize" and "avoid" share the
>    same problems that the WG has discussed.
>    Going way out on a limb here:
>    "If your content might disorient the user
>     (e.g., due to blinking or animations),
>     ensure that the user can control the
>     disorienting content, or provide an
>     alternative that will allow the user
>     to concentrate on the important content."

yes, that's way out on a limb (i.e., really long) <grin/>
I see your intent here and will discuss with the working group.

>5) Checkpoint 2.3: "Give users control of mechanisms
>    that cause extreme changes in content."
>    Are the differences between 2.2 and 2.3 clear
>    enough to merit their separation? Or are both
>    about "Don't do what may disorient the user."?
>    I'll bet the WG chose to separate these on
>    purpose, and I do see some differences between them,
>    but I'm not clear why they need to be distinct.

There may be some overlap perhaps we can combine. We'll discuss. This may 
not change for this first release though.

>6) Checkpoint 4.3: "Design assistive-technology compatible
>    interfaces."
>    "Designing interfaces" sounds like this is for user
>    agent developers. Should this be "use interfaces" like
>    checkpoint 4.2 says "use languages, APIs, and protocols"?

Refer to Cynthia's comments on this one.


wendy a chisholm
world wide web consortium
web accessibility initiative
madison, wi usa
tel: +1 608 663 6346
Received on Thursday, 18 January 2001 15:22:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC